Essay needs to be about 10 pages long
Important Info
The order was placed through a short procedure (customer skipped some order details).
Please clarify some paper details before starting to work on the order.
Type of paper and subject
Number of sources and formatting style
Type of service (writing, rewriting, etc)
Title. Give a title that best summarizes your paper
Introduction. Give a brief introduction to your essay. You should clarify the
question you would want to deal with
Position. State your position toward the paper, i.e., whether you agree or disagree with the positions of the author
Argument/s. Provide argument/s to support your position, which can be based on the readings, or the three major moral theories, or your own ideas
Counter-argument and response. Think of a possible criticism to your argument and response to it
Conclusion. Provide a brief conclusion of your position and argument/s as you have mentioned above.
Bibliography. (Citation format for example: APA, MLA or Chicago)
Word Limit: Between 1500-2500 words but *not* including bibliography, footnotes and endnotes
Reference: Citations or quotations format for example, APA, MLA or Chicago
The use of AI in your essay writing is referred to as the “Guidelines for Using Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) in Teaching and Learning (2023/24) (For Students)” in Moodle.
Hi, Please include a works cited page. Also, when you’re working on in-text citations, no need to be formal, basic things like (line 35) or something like that works. Here is the prompt:
Suppose that life is absurd for the reasons that Camus claims. If that were the case, do you think Camus’s response is appropriate? If you agree with Camus, discuss at least one objection to his proposed response and reply to it. If you do not agree, say why, and briefly describe what you think might be a more fitting response.
Source: Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus, pp. 3-65 (Only use info from these pages)
I appreciate your time and effort, thank you for your work.
The general idea is that you compare and contrast two thinkers.Be sure your essay is fully formed, i.e., introductory remarks, summaries, and analyses. When formulating your position, be sure to make your argument clear.Orient your essay around a single point you want to make, using your thinker(s) concepts and argument(s) as evidence.Be sure to present, describe, and explain significant concepts and their relations:Describe important concepts and lines of reasoning, e.g., ‘He says this, he argues that.’Explain important concepts and lines of reasoning, e.g., ‘This is what he means by this and that.’Connect important concepts and lines of reasoning to your thesis, e.g., ‘So, this is why…’Your completed essay should run between (no fewer than) 1000 and (approximately) 1200 words.Find and develop an epistemological point of contact between TWO (and only two!) of the following thinkers we′ve recently studied: Plato, Descartes, Hume, Appiah, and Toole.
Assignment Guidelines: Write a 1-2 page ( at least 500 words) comparison and contrast essay using the MLA format noted in English 1101 courses. This assignment requries MLA-formatted in-text citations and an MLA-fornatted Works Cited page including citations for Tupac Shakur’s song and Vincent van Gogh’s painting, along with any other quoted or reproduced content. For more information about MLA citation, see the resources in the Unit 5 folder. Compare and contrast the painting with the video/lyrics of Tupac from the posted video in this Unit 5 folder. Be sure to include the following: Include a brief summary for each artistic form. What is your interpretation of the meaning for each creation in terms of art being a source of imitation? Compare and contrast or analyze the similarities and differences between each artistic form. Regarding the painting, discuss the use of color, shapes, and images. Regarding the video/rap, be sure to discuss lyrics, images, and rhythms. Add MLA citation and Works Cited per the requirements described in these directions and include citation for any other sources used. Use this submission folder link to submit this assignment. Please use a Word document to ensure the structure does not change after uploading to the submission folder. Assignment Requirements: Your assignment should be 1-2 full pages, at least 500 words long, and written in essay format. This means it should have separate introduction, body, and conclusion paragraphs. Feel free to write more than the requirement. Your assignment should contain correct spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc. Your assignment should include the points listed above under the Assignment Guidelines. If you are unclear about the above guidelines, email or course message me. Must be well proofread and include the name of the movie or television show episode you are using In-text MLA citation and a Works Cited page are required for this assignment. For assistance with MLA citation, use the resouces linked in the Unit 5 folder. Must be submitted as a Word or PDF document through this submission folder. DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Plagiarism will NOT be accepted. The consequences are not worth it; use your own writing abilities to complete this assignment. If you need any help, contact me to set up a meeting and we will discuss how to complete this assignment.
Revise dissertation based on comments below: (turabian format)
My comments are on page 140 and page 143. You have to download the document that I attached and click on the small box that you will see on the right side of the page of the document.
I am copying and pasting my comments here for your reference.
Pg. 140: You need to begin this chapter with a brief general introduction to the chapter as a whole (i.e. what you will do in this chapter and statement of goal for chapter. This should not be more than 4-6 sentences).
Pg. 143: You need to provide a concluding paragraph in which you state 5-6 sentences what you have concluded from your research. That is, what has your attempt to address the question of the problem of evil within the book of Genesis from a Biblical Theological perspective produced? What did you learn? what insights have you gained with respect to the question of the problem evil? What is your concluding thesis based on the research you just conducted? Finally, you need to provide a closing statement (1-2 sentences) about where you believe further can be done with respect to addressing the problem of evil from a biblical theological perspective.
The evaluation section of your paper should not merely consist in saying you agree or disagree with an argument or position, nor should it consist merely in repeating things the author says. You should offer some independent reasons in favor or against the argument or position you are discussing—what reasons can you offer to think the conclusion is true or false. Your paper should be approximately 1200 words (roughly 4 pages) in length. Please use 12 point Times New Roman font, 1 inch margins, and double space your paper. Papers must be submitted through the Turnitin link on Canvas under Assignments. Apple users should note that Canvas does not support pages format. You need to convert your paper to a pdf before submitting it. The standard late policy from the syllabus will apply, one half a letter grade penalty per calendar day, no papers accepted more than 4 days late. Some dos and don’ts: When discussing ideas that are not your own make sure you cite a source for them, either the reading or my lectures in this case. Failure to cite is a violation of the Academic Honor policy and will result in a reduced grade. Only write about one prompt! Follow the prompt exactly as it is written! See the writing guidelines on canvas for general writing advice. Grading Rubric for Papers Excellent (90 – 100): An excellent essay (a) answers the question(s) asked in the prompt, (b) does so in a very clear, concise, and sufficiently thorough manner, (c) provides an accurate interpretation of the person or people being discussed, (d) has good citation practices, and (e) provides support for why the writer assesses a view a certain way (if such assessment is asked for). Good (80 – 89): A good essay (a) answers the question(s) asked in the prompt, (b) does so in a relatively clear, concise, and thorough manner, (c) provides a relatively accurate interpretation of the person or people being discussed, (d) has adequate citation practices, and (e) provides support for why the writer assesses a view a certain way (if such assessment is asked for). Average (70 – 79): An average essay answers the question, but is lacking in overall clarity, precision or thoroughness. Also, the essay may miss obvious points, give inadequate interpretations of authors, or fail to support opinions with evidence. Average essays may have grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors, which may affect the overall clarity and precision of the essay. May also fail to meet the word requirement. Needs Improvement (60 – 69): An essay that needs improvement may answer some parts of the question, but fails to address the question fully. It is also lacking in overall clarity. It may contain many grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. It may also fail to meet the word requirement. Unacceptable (0 – 59) An unacceptable essay fails to answer the assigned question. It may also fail to meet the word requirement. Any violation of the FSU Honor Policy will result in a failing grade for the
After taking this course, choose one of the philosophers whom we′ve studied. After researching this philosopher′s work, write a paper that address all of the following questions:What is your argument for interpreting this philosopher′s work in the way that you do?What is the best objection to your interpretation?How would you respond to the best objection to your interpretation?Assuming that it is double-spaced, your paper should be no fewer than five and no more than fifteen pages long. Seriously, do not go beyond these limits. Part of the point of this assignment is to learn to write a convincing argument—and no argument will be convincing unless it is succinct.On that note, be sure to cite at least one reliable outside source in your paper. (Examples of reliable sources are The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.) In other words, your textbook shouldn′t be the only source that you cite!
This assignment involves critically evaluating and correcting a paper generated by
ChatGPT. It’s designed to test your analytical skills and your grasp of the course material.
ChatGPT-Generated Paper: During a class session, I will input a prompt into ChatGPT,
asking it to write a paper on a specific topic covered in our readings and discussions.
The topic will be deliberately chosen to challenge ChatGPT, likely resulting in a paper
with various inaccuracies and misunderstandings, particularly in areas where ChatGPT
might confuse psychology with philosophy or misuse technical terms.
Critical Analysis and Correction: Your task is to thoroughly analyze this paper and
identify its flaws. This involves more than just pointing out errors; you need to explain
why they are mistakes, what the correct interpretations or facts are, and how the paper
should have approached the topic. Your critique should be detailed and comprehensive,
demonstrating a deep understanding of the subject matter.
Detailed Correction Submission: Your submission should be a well-articulated, extensive
critique of the ChatGPT paper. It should highlight each error, provide the correct
information or interpretation, and offer an explanation of why ChatGPT’s version was
incorrect. This assignment will require a substantial amount of writing, equivalent in effort
and depth to the other assignments in this course.
Through this exercise, you will not only reinforce your own understanding of cognitive science
but also hone your skills in critical analysis. Correcting the inaccuracies of an AI-generated
paper will challenge you to apply your knowledge in a practical, real-world context, ensuring you
have a robust and accurate understanding of the course material. This assignment is an
opportunity to engage deeply with the nuances of cognitive science, distinguishing between
closely related fields and clarifying complex concepts.
In your final submission you should have your revisions somehow marked and explained. They should be extensive. I’d like to see 800 or so words of changes and/or explinations of your changes/or corrections. You don’t have to change anything if you want to just be grading it and making comments about what is wrong, but you should be writing 800+ words however you approach this assignment. TOPIC – Possible Project Prompt: The Ethical Implications of the Non-Identity Problem
The non-identity problem challenges our ethical intuitions by questioning whether it can be wrong to bring into existence a person whose life is worth living, but is predictably less well-off than a potential person might have been under different circumstances. This philosophical dilemma has significant implications across various real-world issues, including environmental ethics, historical injustices, and bioethical decisions.
For this project, choose one of the following contexts to explore the non-identity problem:
Climate Change: Analyze how the non-identity problem complicates moral arguments for taking aggressive action against climate change. Consider the future generations who will exist in a changed climate—individuals who would not have existed had we made different choices today. How does this affect our moral obligations toward mitigating climate change?
Reparations for Historical Injustices: Examine the argument for reparations in light of the non-identity problem. Given that the present populations of those affected by historical injustices (e.g., slavery, colonization) would not be who they are without these past wrongs, how does the non-identity problem impact the case for reparations?
Bioethical Decisions and Genetic Conditions: Explore the ethical considerations of deciding to have a child at a time when it is known they will be born with a significant health condition (e.g., during a Zika virus outbreak) versus waiting until the risk is minimized. How does the non-identity problem influence our understanding of harm and consent in this context?
Your project should:
Briefly explain the non-identity problem and its significance.
Choose one of the provided contexts for a focused analysis.
Discuss any challenges or limitations these theories face in resolving the non-identity problem within your chosen context.
Conclude with your reasoned argument about how we might navigate the ethical dilemmas posed by the non-identity problem in your selected area.
Your analysis should demonstrate an understanding of the non-identity problem, engage with ethical theories studied in the course, and offer a nuanced exploration of the chosen issue’s moral complexities. Aim to articulate your ideas clearly, supported by reasoned arguments and evidence from course materials and external sources as needed.
UNDERSTAND THE TOPIC GENERATE A PAPER DO THE CORRECTING THING AND WRITE WHAT DID U CORRECTED AND WHY .IN PAPER YOU SHOULD HAVE INTRODUCTION,DIFFERNT BODY, EXAMPLES , TOPICS THAT NEED TO BE IN A PARAGRAPH AND CONCLUSION.
Topic Specified: choose #2 on the file attached
Task summary:
please write a reflection paper based on the author chosen by the client.
Full order description:
Dear Freelancer,
please write a paper:
MAIN DETAILS:
The first paper assignment is designed for you to present at least one of the major theories we have looked at (or perhaps even better, more than one if they are talking about the same issues) by putting it into your own words while also seriously interacting with the view. I’m not looking for you just to explain what the view holds, but why those who hold it do so. What reasons do they give for their view? It’s best if you interact with the text a bit, but I’m not expecting you just to give a bunch of quotes. I want some reflection from your point of view on what the view says and why it says what it says.
You should also have something to say about the issue, which might be simple agreement or disagreement with some entire perspective that you discuss but could be more complex, e.g. agreement on some particular points but not others, or agreement with the conclusions but not with the arguments given for them. You could find things to agree with and disagree with for multiple authors. You could have a positive view that you defend or just explain some elements of the view or views you discuss that you find unconvincing. Or it could involve looking at criticisms of the philosophy you are focusing on and them responding to those criticisms.